Allen West resigns as chair of Texas Republican Party

[Syntyr]

This guy is another John McAfee. Disaster waiting to happen.

[Jeff B.]

Oh yeah…. MM is not quite the stable individual that you’d like leading your State Government.

But then, look at where we are Federally.

IIRC, MM had an issue with APD related to a neighbor’s complaint about noise where he was found to be playing the bongos “au natural” in his living room. Maybe a bit of substance use gone on there?



Jeff B.

[Ruark]

MM is a classic, classic celebrity "attention addict." A legend in his own mind.

[Malawler]

The only thing a challenge to Abbott will accomplish is enough of a split among the Republican vote to allow a Demo-rat to win.

[C-dub]

I was really hoping he was going to try and oust Colin Alred here in Dallas. I think Abbott is doing fine and will be tough to beat and I tend to agree with Malawler for this attempt.

[Flightmare]

The only thing a challenge to Abbott will accomplish is enough of a split among the Republican vote to allow a Demo-rat to win.

I do not get why people keep saying this. The split would happen in a republican primary, in which the democrats have zero involvement.

The winner of the republican primary would be the likely winner of the general election in November. Yes, you would have some voters who are upset their candidate that didn't win and would abstain from voting for Abbott, but I suspect you'll see people undervote Abbott this election anyways due to their displeasure with his recent run.

That being said, the current 3 challengers are likely to all pull votes from each other as they are all attempting to run as anti-Abbott.

[oljames3]

The only thing a challenge to Abbott will accomplish is enough of a split among the Republican vote to allow a Demo-rat to win.

I do not get why people keep saying this. The split would happen in a republican primary, in which the democrats have zero involvement.

The winner of the republican primary would be the likely winner of the general election in November. Yes, you would have some voters who are upset their candidate that didn't win and would abstain from voting for Abbott, but I suspect you'll see people undervote Abbott this election anyways due to their displeasure with his recent run.

That being said, the current 3 challengers are likely to all pull votes from each other as they are all attempting to run as anti-Abbott.

West is not making a third party run, just joining the Republican primary. While I agree that Abbott has not done so poor a job as to be tossed out, a little competition is a good thing. And West is a fellow artillery officer. I'll support him in the primary and vote for Abbott in the general election.

[chasfm11]

The only thing a challenge to Abbott will accomplish is enough of a split among the Republican vote to allow a Demo-rat to win.

I do not get why people keep saying this. The split would happen in a republican primary, in which the democrats have zero involvement.

The winner of the republican primary would be the likely winner of the general election in November. Yes, you would have some voters who are upset their candidate that didn't win and would abstain from voting for Abbott, but I suspect you'll see people undervote Abbott this election anyways due to their displeasure with his recent run.

That being said, the current 3 challengers are likely to all pull votes from each other as they are all attempting to run as anti-Abbott.

The problem in Texas is that Democrats vote in the Republican primaries. They choose the Republican candidate (in some cases) that they want their Democratic candidate to run again in the general election. Voter apathy among the Republicans in the primaries makes this a bigger deal than it should be. Too many people think that showing up for the general election and voting for the Republican candidate gets the job done. Challengers to the "establishment" Republicans (like my own representative) who have poor voting records never get a chance. So we keep sending the same people back to represent us who have failed us in the past.

[K.Mooneyham]

The only thing a challenge to Abbott will accomplish is enough of a split among the Republican vote to allow a Demo-rat to win.

I do not get why people keep saying this. The split would happen in a republican primary, in which the democrats have zero involvement.

The winner of the republican primary would be the likely winner of the general election in November. Yes, you would have some voters who are upset their candidate that didn't win and would abstain from voting for Abbott, but I suspect you'll see people undervote Abbott this election anyways due to their displeasure with his recent run.

That being said, the current 3 challengers are likely to all pull votes from each other as they are all attempting to run as anti-Abbott.

The problem in Texas is that Democrats vote in the Republican primaries. They choose the Republican candidate (in some cases) that they want their Democratic candidate to run again in the general election. Voter apathy among the Republicans in the primaries makes this a bigger deal than it should be. Too many people think that showing up for the general election and voting for the Republican candidate gets the job done. Challengers to the "establishment" Republicans (like my own representative) who have poor voting records never get a chance. So we keep sending the same people back to represent us who have failed us in the past.

I'm constantly trying to get Republican voters to get out and vote in the primaries. Many folks complain about candidates in the general election, but simply cannot be bothered to vote in primary elections. Makes you wonder if they even understand how it all works.

[Flightmare]

The only thing a challenge to Abbott will accomplish is enough of a split among the Republican vote to allow a Demo-rat to win.

I do not get why people keep saying this. The split would happen in a republican primary, in which the democrats have zero involvement.

The winner of the republican primary would be the likely winner of the general election in November. Yes, you would have some voters who are upset their candidate that didn't win and would abstain from voting for Abbott, but I suspect you'll see people undervote Abbott this election anyways due to their displeasure with his recent run.

That being said, the current 3 challengers are likely to all pull votes from each other as they are all attempting to run as anti-Abbott.

The problem in Texas is that Democrats vote in the Republican primaries. They choose the Republican candidate (in some cases) that they want their Democratic candidate to run again in the general election. Voter apathy among the Republicans in the primaries makes this a bigger deal than it should be. Too many people think that showing up for the general election and voting for the Republican candidate gets the job done. Challengers to the "establishment" Republicans (like my own representative) who have poor voting records never get a chance. So we keep sending the same people back to represent us who have failed us in the past.

I'm constantly trying to get Republican voters to get out and vote in the primaries. Many folks complain about candidates in the general election, but simply cannot be bothered to vote in primary elections. Makes you wonder if they even understand how it all works.

K.Mooneyham: Sadly, many do NOT know how it works. I had to educate someone voting in a primary election (apparently for the first time) when they were confused why there were separate lines for democrats and republicans at the polling location.

chasfm11: The solution is to engage more people in the primary process. The only way to get better candidates is to select the best candidate in the primary election. This should be where we sharpen our blade by choosing the stronger candidate.

I have always said that my thought process for elections is to vote for the candidate on the ballot that I believe will be the most effective advocate for issues I believe need to be addressed. I repeat the process for any runoff and general election. Sometimes my preferred candidate does not win the primary or runoff. The thought process is still the same, vote for the candidate who will be the most effective advocate. And just because I agree with a particular candidate more than others, does not mean I believe they will be an effective advocate. They may advocate for the issues I agree with, but if they're not effective....what is the point?

[Charles L. Cotton]

There's much that will come out about Allen West as the campaign heats up. There's a hell of a lot more voters need to know about West than just his blatant disregard of the law. The paragraphs below were taken from a 2004 New York Times article.

In August, Colonel West learned from an intelligence specialist of a supposed plot to assassinate him, which would endanger the soldiers who traveled with him, too. The plot reportedly involved Mr. Hamoodi, a police officer who occasionally worked for the Americans. Although Mr. Hamoodi is a Shiite Muslim, and most attacks against Americans were carried out by Sunnis loyal to Saddam Hussein, some police officers do cooperate with the insurgents and several have been accused of attacking foreigners.

Colonel West said he initially thought ''the information was a joke.'' But a week later several of his officers were ambushed when he was supposed to be traveling with them. A roadside bomb sheared off the back panel of a Humvee, and a firefight ensued. None of his men were seriously hurt, but Colonel West began taking the risk of an assassination seriously.

On Aug. 20, he asked his men to pick up Mr. Hamoodi and bring him to the base. ''There was a sense of urgency because I felt in the next couple of days, something was going to happen,'' Colonel West testified at his hearing.

In an interview in Baghdad, Mr. Hamoodi, a thin, bespectacled 31-year-old, said aides to Colonel West stopped by his police station and asked him to join them on patrol. Mr. Hamoodi climbed into the back of their open Humvee, he said, and the vehicle soon jerked off the road.

Soldiers testified later that Mr. Hamoodi appeared to go for his weapon and needed to be subdued. Mr. Hamoodi said that one soldier punched him several times, and that he was handcuffed, shackled and blindfolded.

At the base, he said, they threw him, still bound, off the Humvee, then led him into the jail and eventually into an interrogation room. They pressed him for the details of an assassination plan, about which he knew nothing, he said. During the interrogation, he said, the translator kicked him in the shin and told him he needed to confess before Colonel West showed up to kill him.

Mr. Hamoodi said he felt relieved to hear the colonel was expected. He considered Colonel West to be ''calm, quiet, clever and sociable.'' When the colonel first entered the interrogation room, Mr. Hamoodi said, he thought, ''Here is the man who will treat me fairly.''

Then, he said, Colonel West cocked his gun.

Colonel West said that he did not then put a round in the gun's chamber but that he did place the pistol in his lap. He asked Mr. Hamoodi why he wanted to kill him. Mr. Hamoodi said that he protested, ''I've worked with you, I like you,'' but that Colonel West silenced his protest. Colonel West pressed for the names and locations of those involved in the supposed plot, and he got no answers.

Soon, the soldiers began striking and shoving Mr. Hamoodi. They were not instructed to do so by Colonel West but they were not stopped, either, they said. ''I didn't know it was wrong to hit a detainee,'' a 20-year-old soldier from Daytona Beach said at the hearing. Colonel West testified that he would have stopped the beating ''had it become too excessive.''

Eventually, the colonel and his soldiers moved Mr. Hamoodi outside, and threatened him with death. Colonel West said he fired a warning shot in the air and began counting down from five. He asked his soldiers to put Mr. Hamoodi's head in a sand-filled barrel usually used for clearing weapons. At the end of his count, Colonel West fired a shot into the barrel, angling his gun away from the Iraqi's head, he testified.

According to the interpreter, Mr. Hamoodi finally ''admitted there would be attacks, and called out names.'' Mr. Hamoodi said that he was not sure what he told the Americans, but that it was meaningless information induced by fear and pain.

At least one man named by Mr. Hamoodi was taken into custody, according to testimony, and his home was searched. No plans for attacks on Americans or weapons were found. Colonel West testified that he did not know whether ''any corroboration'' of a plot was ever found, adding: ''At the time I had to base my decision on the intelligence I received. It's possible that I was wrong about Mr. Hamoodi.'
https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/worl ... ainee.html
'

I know some people are going to praise West for his actions. To those folks I would ask, "what laws should a Governor West be allowed to ignore at his whim?" He violated at least two provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and allowed or ordered his men to do likewise. Is that okay in your mind? If so, then where is the limit? If you condone his actions in Iraqi, then never complain about any COP that violates a citizen's rights. That would be a double standard that no honorable man would accept.

But the Iraqi incident that ended his career is far from the only thing voters need to know about West. Other things, many other things, will be coming out during the campaign.

Chas.

[Hoodasnacks]

There's much that will come out about Allen West as the campaign heats up. There's a hell of a lot more voters need to know about West than just his blatant disregard of the law. The paragraphs below were taken from a 2004 New York Times article.

In August, Colonel West learned from an intelligence specialist of a supposed plot to assassinate him, which would endanger the soldiers who traveled with him, too. The plot reportedly involved Mr. Hamoodi, a police officer who occasionally worked for the Americans. Although Mr. Hamoodi is a Shiite Muslim, and most attacks against Americans were carried out by Sunnis loyal to Saddam Hussein, some police officers do cooperate with the insurgents and several have been accused of attacking foreigners.

Colonel West said he initially thought ''the information was a joke.'' But a week later several of his officers were ambushed when he was supposed to be traveling with them. A roadside bomb sheared off the back panel of a Humvee, and a firefight ensued. None of his men were seriously hurt, but Colonel West began taking the risk of an assassination seriously.

On Aug. 20, he asked his men to pick up Mr. Hamoodi and bring him to the base. ''There was a sense of urgency because I felt in the next couple of days, something was going to happen,'' Colonel West testified at his hearing.

In an interview in Baghdad, Mr. Hamoodi, a thin, bespectacled 31-year-old, said aides to Colonel West stopped by his police station and asked him to join them on patrol. Mr. Hamoodi climbed into the back of their open Humvee, he said, and the vehicle soon jerked off the road.

Soldiers testified later that Mr. Hamoodi appeared to go for his weapon and needed to be subdued. Mr. Hamoodi said that one soldier punched him several times, and that he was handcuffed, shackled and blindfolded.

At the base, he said, they threw him, still bound, off the Humvee, then led him into the jail and eventually into an interrogation room. They pressed him for the details of an assassination plan, about which he knew nothing, he said. During the interrogation, he said, the translator kicked him in the shin and told him he needed to confess before Colonel West showed up to kill him.

Mr. Hamoodi said he felt relieved to hear the colonel was expected. He considered Colonel West to be ''calm, quiet, clever and sociable.'' When the colonel first entered the interrogation room, Mr. Hamoodi said, he thought, ''Here is the man who will treat me fairly.''

Then, he said, Colonel West cocked his gun.

Colonel West said that he did not then put a round in the gun's chamber but that he did place the pistol in his lap. He asked Mr. Hamoodi why he wanted to kill him. Mr. Hamoodi said that he protested, ''I've worked with you, I like you,'' but that Colonel West silenced his protest. Colonel West pressed for the names and locations of those involved in the supposed plot, and he got no answers.

Soon, the soldiers began striking and shoving Mr. Hamoodi. They were not instructed to do so by Colonel West but they were not stopped, either, they said. ''I didn't know it was wrong to hit a detainee,'' a 20-year-old soldier from Daytona Beach said at the hearing. Colonel West testified that he would have stopped the beating ''had it become too excessive.''

Eventually, the colonel and his soldiers moved Mr. Hamoodi outside, and threatened him with death. Colonel West said he fired a warning shot in the air and began counting down from five. He asked his soldiers to put Mr. Hamoodi's head in a sand-filled barrel usually used for clearing weapons. At the end of his count, Colonel West fired a shot into the barrel, angling his gun away from the Iraqi's head, he testified.

According to the interpreter, Mr. Hamoodi finally ''admitted there would be attacks, and called out names.'' Mr. Hamoodi said that he was not sure what he told the Americans, but that it was meaningless information induced by fear and pain.

At least one man named by Mr. Hamoodi was taken into custody, according to testimony, and his home was searched. No plans for attacks on Americans or weapons were found. Colonel West testified that he did not know whether ''any corroboration'' of a plot was ever found, adding: ''At the time I had to base my decision on the intelligence I received. It's possible that I was wrong about Mr. Hamoodi.'
https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/worl ... ainee.html
'

I know some people are going to praise West for his actions. To those folks I would ask, "what laws should a Governor West be allowed to ignore at his whim?" He violated at least two provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and allowed or ordered his men to do likewise. Is that okay in your mind? If so, then where is the limit? If you condone his actions in Iraqi, then never complain about any COP that violates a citizen's rights. That would be a double standard that no honorable man would accept.

But the Iraqi incident that ended his career is far from the only thing voters need to know about West. Other things, many other things, will be coming out during the campaign.

Chas.

I appreciate this information. That said, I will not base any opinion of a Republican on a biased NYT article. It is really easy to tell a story with half of the facts and make it look really bad. For example, the article does not mention what intelligence West had--which is needed in order to understand where a person would draw a line on being "excessive." The military seems to agree that West was in the wrong, but it was apparently a close enough call to not seriously punish him. If I'm being fair, there are situations where I'd fire a warning shot close to someone if I was confident that certain danger was imminent. I am inclined to not judge him based on this incident without all of the facts. Others will, so it does need to be taken into account when choosing a candidate.

I respectfully think that you oversimplified the issue. If I condone West's actions, I can't complain about a cop's actions? Not so. I can recognize that a mistake on a job does not warrant a life sentence. Cops violate citizens rights by mistake while acting on what they thought were correct assumptions. When this happens, we proceed accordingly. Cops get reprimanded, temp suspensions, and even fired. I'm not one to hold that over a person for the rest of their lives. Especially someone in an extremely high stress environment. There is no dishonorable double standard in overlooking a past mistake. I do not think it was your intent to attack, but we do need to be careful to not hurt ourselves in this primary process. There are good reasons why one person would support West, Huffines, Prather, etc.

I'm a Greg Abbott fan, but I am also perfectly willing to elect someone that may be better. We should all be willing to put up the best person. With all the newcomers here I want the most Texan governor we can find to set a tone for the rest of the country.

[Charles L. Cotton]

There's much that will come out about Allen West as the campaign heats up. There's a hell of a lot more voters need to know about West than just his blatant disregard of the law. The paragraphs below were taken from a 2004 New York Times article.

In August, Colonel West learned from an intelligence specialist of a supposed plot to assassinate him, which would endanger the soldiers who traveled with him, too. The plot reportedly involved Mr. Hamoodi, a police officer who occasionally worked for the Americans. Although Mr. Hamoodi is a Shiite Muslim, and most attacks against Americans were carried out by Sunnis loyal to Saddam Hussein, some police officers do cooperate with the insurgents and several have been accused of attacking foreigners.

Colonel West said he initially thought ''the information was a joke.'' But a week later several of his officers were ambushed when he was supposed to be traveling with them. A roadside bomb sheared off the back panel of a Humvee, and a firefight ensued. None of his men were seriously hurt, but Colonel West began taking the risk of an assassination seriously.

On Aug. 20, he asked his men to pick up Mr. Hamoodi and bring him to the base. ''There was a sense of urgency because I felt in the next couple of days, something was going to happen,'' Colonel West testified at his hearing.

In an interview in Baghdad, Mr. Hamoodi, a thin, bespectacled 31-year-old, said aides to Colonel West stopped by his police station and asked him to join them on patrol. Mr. Hamoodi climbed into the back of their open Humvee, he said, and the vehicle soon jerked off the road.

Soldiers testified later that Mr. Hamoodi appeared to go for his weapon and needed to be subdued. Mr. Hamoodi said that one soldier punched him several times, and that he was handcuffed, shackled and blindfolded.

At the base, he said, they threw him, still bound, off the Humvee, then led him into the jail and eventually into an interrogation room. They pressed him for the details of an assassination plan, about which he knew nothing, he said. During the interrogation, he said, the translator kicked him in the shin and told him he needed to confess before Colonel West showed up to kill him.

Mr. Hamoodi said he felt relieved to hear the colonel was expected. He considered Colonel West to be ''calm, quiet, clever and sociable.'' When the colonel first entered the interrogation room, Mr. Hamoodi said, he thought, ''Here is the man who will treat me fairly.''

Then, he said, Colonel West cocked his gun.

Colonel West said that he did not then put a round in the gun's chamber but that he did place the pistol in his lap. He asked Mr. Hamoodi why he wanted to kill him. Mr. Hamoodi said that he protested, ''I've worked with you, I like you,'' but that Colonel West silenced his protest. Colonel West pressed for the names and locations of those involved in the supposed plot, and he got no answers.

Soon, the soldiers began striking and shoving Mr. Hamoodi. They were not instructed to do so by Colonel West but they were not stopped, either, they said. ''I didn't know it was wrong to hit a detainee,'' a 20-year-old soldier from Daytona Beach said at the hearing. Colonel West testified that he would have stopped the beating ''had it become too excessive.''

Eventually, the colonel and his soldiers moved Mr. Hamoodi outside, and threatened him with death. Colonel West said he fired a warning shot in the air and began counting down from five. He asked his soldiers to put Mr. Hamoodi's head in a sand-filled barrel usually used for clearing weapons. At the end of his count, Colonel West fired a shot into the barrel, angling his gun away from the Iraqi's head, he testified.

According to the interpreter, Mr. Hamoodi finally ''admitted there would be attacks, and called out names.'' Mr. Hamoodi said that he was not sure what he told the Americans, but that it was meaningless information induced by fear and pain.

At least one man named by Mr. Hamoodi was taken into custody, according to testimony, and his home was searched. No plans for attacks on Americans or weapons were found. Colonel West testified that he did not know whether ''any corroboration'' of a plot was ever found, adding: ''At the time I had to base my decision on the intelligence I received. It's possible that I was wrong about Mr. Hamoodi.'
https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/worl ... ainee.html
'

I know some people are going to praise West for his actions. To those folks I would ask, "what laws should a Governor West be allowed to ignore at his whim?" He violated at least two provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and allowed or ordered his men to do likewise. Is that okay in your mind? If so, then where is the limit? If you condone his actions in Iraqi, then never complain about any COP that violates a citizen's rights. That would be a double standard that no honorable man would accept.

But the Iraqi incident that ended his career is far from the only thing voters need to know about West. Other things, many other things, will be coming out during the campaign.

Chas.

I appreciate this information. That said, I will not base any opinion of a Republican on a biased NYT article. It is really easy to tell a story with half of the facts and make it look really bad. For example, the article does not mention what intelligence West had--which is needed in order to understand where a person would draw a line on being "excessive." The military seems to agree that West was in the wrong, but it was apparently a close enough call to not seriously punish him. If I'm being fair, there are situations where I'd fire a warning shot close to someone if I was confident that certain danger was imminent. I am inclined to not judge him based on this incident without all of the facts. Others will, so it does need to be taken into account when choosing a candidate.

I respectfully think that you oversimplified the issue. If I condone West's actions, I can't complain about a cop's actions? Not so. I can recognize that a mistake on a job does not warrant a life sentence. Cops violate citizens rights by mistake while acting on what they thought were correct assumptions. When this happens, we proceed accordingly. Cops get reprimanded, temp suspensions, and even fired. I'm not one to hold that over a person for the rest of their lives. Especially someone in an extremely high stress environment. There is no dishonorable double standard in overlooking a past mistake. I do not think it was your intent to attack, but we do need to be careful to not hurt ourselves in this primary process. There are good reasons why one person would support West, Huffines, Prather, etc.

I'm a Greg Abbott fan, but I am also perfectly willing to elect someone that may be better. We should all be willing to put up the best person. With all the newcomers here I want the most Texan governor we can find to set a tone for the rest of the country.

That's just one article, so look for more if you want to confirm the facts. Note that the article is quoting heavily from testimony given by West and his men during the Article 15 hearing. It's not just NYT propaganda.

West violated the UCMJ pure and simple. The amount of intelligence, or lack thereof, wouldn't change that fact. You try to give him an out by referencing "imminent danger" but there was no such evidence admitted during the hearing. An accidental or unintentional violation of constitutional rights by a COP is not close to what happened with West. He allowed/ordered his men to take action that violated the UCMJ then he did so himself. A better comparison would be a police officer beating a suspect, then demanding information and confession by sticking his head in a barrel and firing a pistol next to his ear.

Chas.

[eyedoc]

There's much that will come out about Allen West as the campaign heats up. There's a hell of a lot more voters need to know about West than just his blatant disregard of the law. The paragraphs below were taken from a 2004 New York Times article.

In August, Colonel West learned from an intelligence specialist of a supposed plot to assassinate him, which would endanger the soldiers who traveled with him, too. The plot reportedly involved Mr. Hamoodi, a police officer who occasionally worked for the Americans. Although Mr. Hamoodi is a Shiite Muslim, and most attacks against Americans were carried out by Sunnis loyal to Saddam Hussein, some police officers do cooperate with the insurgents and several have been accused of attacking foreigners.

Colonel West said he initially thought ''the information was a joke.'' But a week later several of his officers were ambushed when he was supposed to be traveling with them. A roadside bomb sheared off the back panel of a Humvee, and a firefight ensued. None of his men were seriously hurt, but Colonel West began taking the risk of an assassination seriously.

On Aug. 20, he asked his men to pick up Mr. Hamoodi and bring him to the base. ''There was a sense of urgency because I felt in the next couple of days, something was going to happen,'' Colonel West testified at his hearing.

In an interview in Baghdad, Mr. Hamoodi, a thin, bespectacled 31-year-old, said aides to Colonel West stopped by his police station and asked him to join them on patrol. Mr. Hamoodi climbed into the back of their open Humvee, he said, and the vehicle soon jerked off the road.

Soldiers testified later that Mr. Hamoodi appeared to go for his weapon and needed to be subdued. Mr. Hamoodi said that one soldier punched him several times, and that he was handcuffed, shackled and blindfolded.

At the base, he said, they threw him, still bound, off the Humvee, then led him into the jail and eventually into an interrogation room. They pressed him for the details of an assassination plan, about which he knew nothing, he said. During the interrogation, he said, the translator kicked him in the shin and told him he needed to confess before Colonel West showed up to kill him.

Mr. Hamoodi said he felt relieved to hear the colonel was expected. He considered Colonel West to be ''calm, quiet, clever and sociable.'' When the colonel first entered the interrogation room, Mr. Hamoodi said, he thought, ''Here is the man who will treat me fairly.''

Then, he said, Colonel West cocked his gun.

Colonel West said that he did not then put a round in the gun's chamber but that he did place the pistol in his lap. He asked Mr. Hamoodi why he wanted to kill him. Mr. Hamoodi said that he protested, ''I've worked with you, I like you,'' but that Colonel West silenced his protest. Colonel West pressed for the names and locations of those involved in the supposed plot, and he got no answers.

Soon, the soldiers began striking and shoving Mr. Hamoodi. They were not instructed to do so by Colonel West but they were not stopped, either, they said. ''I didn't know it was wrong to hit a detainee,'' a 20-year-old soldier from Daytona Beach said at the hearing. Colonel West testified that he would have stopped the beating ''had it become too excessive.''

Eventually, the colonel and his soldiers moved Mr. Hamoodi outside, and threatened him with death. Colonel West said he fired a warning shot in the air and began counting down from five. He asked his soldiers to put Mr. Hamoodi's head in a sand-filled barrel usually used for clearing weapons. At the end of his count, Colonel West fired a shot into the barrel, angling his gun away from the Iraqi's head, he testified.

According to the interpreter, Mr. Hamoodi finally ''admitted there would be attacks, and called out names.'' Mr. Hamoodi said that he was not sure what he told the Americans, but that it was meaningless information induced by fear and pain.

At least one man named by Mr. Hamoodi was taken into custody, according to testimony, and his home was searched. No plans for attacks on Americans or weapons were found. Colonel West testified that he did not know whether ''any corroboration'' of a plot was ever found, adding: ''At the time I had to base my decision on the intelligence I received. It's possible that I was wrong about Mr. Hamoodi.'
https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/worl ... ainee.html
'

I know some people are going to praise West for his actions. To those folks I would ask, "what laws should a Governor West be allowed to ignore at his whim?" He violated at least two provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and allowed or ordered his men to do likewise. Is that okay in your mind? If so, then where is the limit? If you condone his actions in Iraqi, then never complain about any COP that violates a citizen's rights. That would be a double standard that no honorable man would accept.

But the Iraqi incident that ended his career is far from the only thing voters need to know about West. Other things, many other things, will be coming out during the campaign.

Chas.

My uncle was a colonel in the army. Stuff like that would never fly with him. He gave up his general star on principles because of what they wanted him to do in North Comm.

[Paladin]

Appreciate the info.